Back in WiTP, I put toghether a guideline on how I chose leaders. It was based on a Meta-analysis of posts by several people, including Mike Wood who gave significant insight into the game.

Any comments on below based on what may have changed for leaders in AE?

HQ LeadersCommand Headquarters

Combat Commands - Those in which significant and important battles occur within their command radius. Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Administration Skill - This influences the HQ units use of support to reduce fatigue and disruption

High Land Skill - Influences the Assault Value of LCU's within their radius

High Inspiration - Influences the Assault Value of LCU's within their radius

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Rear Area Commands - Those in which significant and important battles will not occur within their command radius. Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Administration Skill - This influences the HQ units use of support to reduce fatigue and disruption

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Corps/Army Headquarters

Front Line Corps' - Those in which significant and important battles occur within their command radius. Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Administration Skill - This influences the HQ units use of support to reduce fatigue and disruption

High Land Skill - Influences the Assault Value of LCU's within their radius

High Inspiration - Influences the Assault Value of LCU's within their radius

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Rear Area Corps' - Those in which significant and important battles will not occur within their command radius. Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Administration Skill - This influences the HQ units use of support to reduce fatigue and disruption

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Notes on Corps HQ Employment:

Seek to put a corps HQ into or one hex from key battles

Seek to put a Corps HQ in the hex with defensive bastions, invasions, and major assaults

Corps HQ should only be used for rear area duties if you have more than you need for front line duties, then use them at designated R&R and Training bases.

The Amphibious Corps HQ function as Corps HQ and not Amphibious HQ. This applies to the I, III, & V Amphibious Corps and not the III, V, & VII Amphibious Force.

Amphibious Force Headquarters

Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Land Skill - This influences the Amphibious Landings in that units will land faster, with less disruption and fewer losses

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Notes on Amphibious Force HQ Employment:

Load these HQ's onto AGC's in their own TF set to Do Not Unload.

Have the AGC TF arrive in the invasion landing hex in the same phase as the first wave landing TF's

Keep them in the landing hex until the base is captured or the enemy is defeated, whichever comes first, then skeedaddle away to safety where the AGC will not get sunk. You only get three of these HQ's (if you are the allies...the Japanese get none). They will respawn, but better not tolose them too many times.

Amphibious Force HQ do not function as Corps HQ. A good invasion should have a Corps HQ land with the invading forces.

Naval Headquarters

Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

The qualities and skills of the HQ leader has no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

A Naval HQ is a good place for your stupidest, most incompetent admirals to become heroes

Notes on Naval HQ Employment:

Place a Naval HQ in a forward repair depot. This will facilitate rapid repair and return to battle. A forward repair depot is a reasonably large port near the area of action. Reasonably large means size 5 or better so that damaged devices can be repaired.

Place a Naval HQ far forward so that crippled ships in danger of sinking can slip into a nearby port within the HQ's range and enhance their chances of being saved.

Place a Naval HQ in a Major repair shipyard to speed repairs (not sure if the HQ will exert an influence on a port that is already size 10).

Most Naval HQ have naval support squads, so can assist in loading/unloading cargo and rearming ships.

Air Headquarters

Select leaders on the basis of these priorities:

High Air Skill - This influences the number of strike and patrol aircraft that will fly.

All other skills have no influence or bearing on the HQ function.

Notes on Air HQ Employment:

Air HQ have a dramatic influence on level bombers. It is important to have an air HQ within range of your level bomber bases.

Air HQ exert significant influence over other strike aircraft. It is good to have an air HQ in range of your bases from which strikes other than level bombers fly.

Air HQ exert an influence over patrol aircraft. It is beneficial to have an air HQ in range of your bases with patrol aircraft.

In Naval TF’s with Carriers (CV, CVL, CVE), the TF commander serves as the Air HQ for the carrier aircraft.

Note that the Leadership Value of Headquarters Commanders is completely irrelevant other than its influence on the Headquarters unit itself. That is it will influence how rapidly the HQ unit gains experience. The only value of the HQ Unit's experience is for its own defense. Therefore, do not bother installing your "strong leaders" in HQ Units. Look for the qualities that are specific to their function.

TF Leaders

Task Force Commander Selection

Task Force Commanders are selected in one of three ways:

If Auto-select Commander is set to Off when the TF is formed, then the TF Commander is the captain of the Flagship.

If Auto-select Commander is set to On, then the TF Commander is selected randomly from the pool of available RADM and VADM TF Commanders.

After formation of the TF, the player may select the TF, if the TF is docked in a port, by clicking on the name of the TF Commander and selecting from the list of available RADM's and VADM's. This incurs a Political Point Cost.

Note: Rank has no bearing on the designation of the TF Commander. It is possible to create situations in which an Ensign is the TF Commander with ships/craft commanded by LTJG's and LT's and similar cases.

Flagship Selection

The Flagship of the Task Force is determined automatically using the following guidelines:

Flagships are designated in order of Ship Class: AGC-CV-BB-BC-CVL-CA-CL-CLAA-CVE-DD (the list continues through all classes)

Between ships of the same class, the largest ship in the task force (highest durability) is selected as the Flagship.

For ships of the same class and equal durability, the last ship selected or added to the TF is the Flagship.

The nationality of the Flagship determines the nationality of the TF and therefore the available pool of RADM and VADM to command the TF.

Air Combat TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Air Skill - The TF Commander functions as an Air HQ for the airgroups. This will influence how many atrike aircraft will fly.

Aggression - Influences how likely the TF is to react and move toward an enemy. High aggression can result in your carrier group running into a fight. Be careful in this selection.

Surface Skill - To save your hind quarters (and I am not talking Russian Helicopters), if you are unfortunate enough to get in a surface engagment.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Surface Combat TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - To gain suprise and cross the T in an engagement

Aggression - High Aggression will increase the likelyhood that the Surface Combat TF will react and seek a fight (be careful... A TF for two DD's with an Admiral of 100 agression will probably pick a fight with some BB's... This rarely ends well for the DD's)

Air Skill - Of small import, but it influences the float plane operations from the Capital Ships.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

ASW Combat TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - Influences probability of finding submarines.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Bombardment TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Aggression - Influences the probability that the TF will convert to a Surface Combat TF.

Surface Skill - Influences TF in a fight the same as Surface Combat.

Air Skill - Of small import, but it influences the float plane operations from the Capital Ships.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Fast Transport TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - Influences TF in a fight the same as Surface Combat.

Air Skill - Of small import, but it influences the float plane operations from the Capital Ships.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Transport, Replenishment TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - Influences TF in a fight the same as Surface Combat. Also, it Influences probability of the escort combatants finding submarines

Air Skill - Influences the operations of strike aircraft and float planes from the Escort Carriers and Cruisers.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Mine Warfare YF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - Influences TF in a fight the same as Surface Combat.

Air Skill - Of small import, but it influences the float plane operations from the Cruisers.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Escort TF

Select the TF Commander based on these qualities:

Surface Skill - If operating with the intent to engage surface combatants coming after the escorted TF, it Influences TF in a fight the same as Surface Combat. Also, it Influences probability of finding submarines

Air Skill - Influences the operations of strike aircraft and float planes from the Carriers, Escort Carriers and Capital Ship.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Notes on Selecting TF Leaders without assigning a leader:

Using the Flagship Selection Criteria above, select the ship with the Captain that best fits type of TF being formed as Flagship so that he is the TF Commander.

Any TF that is formed to perform any fighting function should have a competant Admiral assigned

Air Group Leaders

Selecting leaders for air groups is a fairly complex task. Most aircraft can perform multiple roles, so leader selection criteria must include consideration of how the air group will be employed.

Notes on Air Group Operations Influenced by Leader Qualities

Pilot experience affects operational losses.

Air groups with morale < 50 must pass a morale test before flying an offensive mission. If the test is failed, no aircraft will fly.

Air groups flying Naval Search, ASW Patrol, or CAP must pass two morale tests before flying. Each morale test failed reduces the number of aircraft flying by 25%.

Level Bombers must pass three tests before flying an offensive mission. Each test failed reduces the number of aircraft flying by 25%:

Experience test.

Test against the leader’s Air Skill.

Morale test.

Pilot experience affects the chances to find the target in a strike mission.

Pilot experience affects air-to-air combat results.

Leader’s air skill affects results in air-to-air combat.

CAP as Principle Role

This includes Fighters, Fighter-Bombers, Night-Fighters, and Float-Fighters. Assign leader using these priorities:

Inspiration – Influences the number of CAP aircraft that will fly. Influences air group morale recovery.

Inspiration – Influences the number of patrol aircraft that will fly. Influences air group morale recovery.

Leadership – Influences the air group’s experience gain.

Of small import, Air Skill influences results in air-to-air combat (aircraft can be intercepted by CAP, but this is unlikely).

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Transport Missions as Principle Role

Missions include Supply Transport and Troop Transport. Air Groups include Transports, Patrol, and Level Bombers. Assign leader using these priorities:

Inspiration –Influences air group morale recovery.

Leadership – Influences the air group’s experience gain.

Of small import, Air Skill influences results in air-to-air combat.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Training Mission as Principle Role

This includes all air groups. Assign leader using these priorities:

Inspiration –Influences air group morale recovery.

Leadership – Influences the air group’s experience gain.

Of small import, Air Skill influences results in air-to-air combat.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Ship LeadersShip Captains

Carriers

This includes CV, CVL, and CVE. Assign leader using these priorities:

Leadership – Influences the ship’s experience gain

Air Skill – If the carrier captain will serve as the TF Commander, then he functions as the Air HQ for the TF aircraft. Air skill then influences the number of strike and patrol aircraft that will fly.

Air Skill – Of very small import. If the ship captain will serve as the TF Commander in a combat task force, then he functions as the Air HQ for the TF float planes. Air skill then influences the number of strike and patrol aircraft that will fly.

Air Skill – Of very small import. If the ship captain will serve as the TF Commander in a non-combat task force containing and operating float planes (i.e. Japanese AV with float planes loaded), then he functions as the Air HQ for the TF float planes. Air skill then influences the number of strike and patrol aircraft that will fly.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Submarines

Assign leader using these priorities:

Aggression – Influences sub’s chance of contacting enemy TF’s

Surface – Influences sub’s chance of contact and survivability in an ASW attack

Leadership – Influences the ship’s experience gain

Air Skill – A curious consideration only. The captain of a Japanese submarine that will serve as the TF Commander in a sub patrol task force containing and operating float planes (i.e. E14Y1 Glen's on Types J3, A1, B1, A2, B2, B3/4, AM, or STo), then he functions as the Air HQ for the TF float planes. Air skill then influences the number of strike and patrol aircraft that will fly.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Land Unit Leaders LCU leaders should be selected based on how the LCU is being employed.

HQ Units

Assign HQ Unit Leaders using the criteria for HQ units. As considerations beyond the HQ unit’s function, use the following in order of priorities:

Inspiration – Influences fatigue reduction, morale reduction due to fatigue, disabled elements destroyed due to fatigue, and assault value for attack and defense.

Leadership – Influences experience gain.

Administration – Influences ability to use Supply to reduce Disruption and Fatigue.

Inspiration – Influences fatigue reduction, morale reduction due to fatigue, disabled elements destroyed due to fatigue, and assault value for attack and defense.

Leadership – Influences experience gain.

Administration – Influences ability to use Supply to reduce Disruption and Fatigue.

No other skills or qualities have any influence.

Rear Area Units Training or Rear Area Functional Units

Units can use training to gain experience up to an allowable maximum based on the unit nationality. If unit is in the rear area in order to train, assign unit leaders using the following order of priorities:

Leadership – Influences experience gain.

Administration – Influences ability to use Supply to reduce Disruption and Fatigue.

Inspiration – Influences fatigue reduction, morale reduction due to fatigue, disabled elements destroyed due to fatigue, and assault value for attack and defense.

Units can be moved to a rear area to reconstitute (ideally out of a malaria or cold zone or in a base large enough to negate the effects). If the units are in the rear area to restore disabled elements, reduce fatigue, and replace lost elements, assign unit leaders using the following order of priorities:

Administration – Influences ability to use Supply to reduce Disruption and Fatigue.

Inspiration – Influences fatigue reduction, morale reduction due to fatigue, disabled elements destroyed due to fatigue, and assault value for attack and defense.

One thing that I did not note about Task Force leaders. My philosophy is to always assign one using the Auto Assign feature. I do this regadless of what the TF is, even if the TF is a single ship. No TF is to small for a TF commander. Even if I was running a single xAKL from Seattle to Sitka, I would assign a leader.

Your TF leaders gain experience and improve their skills by being at sea. This is how you improve your pool of leaders.

On the TF's that really matter, use the auto-assign feature. There is always a chance that you will get the TF commander you want for it. If you don't, then you were going to spend the PP's anyway.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

I wonder what sort of changes were made, if any. For example, there are anecdotal reports that high aggression makes for better ASW prosecution. Your meta analysis makes a great launch pad for further discussion.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

I wonder what sort of changes were made, if any. For example, there are anecdotal reports that high aggression makes for better ASW prosecution. Your meta analysis makes a great launch pad for further discussion.

I used Mike Wood's post of what factors were included in the game calculations and random result generation for WiTP. Mike says that a lot has changed in the code, but there is nothing in the documentation or posts by the developers to indicate any change has been made with regard to how leader qualities effect combat and such.

I tend to discount much of the anecdotal analysis in many posts. Often we see the results that we want to see or make conclusions on a single data point. If we don't have teh actual code or the developers to tell us what the equations are, then we can test. The way to really test it to create a mini-scenario where you can vary the factor you want and then run many turns.

I did this with a submarine/ASW conflict. I set one Japanese submarine against US two destroyers (Type J1 versus two Porters). I set both to end in the same hex. I ran it 5 times with a low aggression TF commander (set to 30) and 5 times with a high agression TF commander (70). The frequency of engagement between the two conditions show no statistically significant difference.

Just a single test with a few runs, but good enough to state that in the test runs the difference in commander aggression made no apparent difference.

< Message edited by wwengr -- 1/17/2010 6:33:10 PM >

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

I wonder what sort of changes were made, if any. For example, there are anecdotal reports that high aggression makes for better ASW prosecution. Your meta analysis makes a great launch pad for further discussion.

I used Mike Wood's post of what factors were included in the game calculations and random result generation for WiTP. Mike says that a lot has changed in the code, but there is nothing in the documentation or posts by the developers to indicate any change has been made with regard to how leader qualities effect combat and such.

I tend to discount much of the anecdotal analysis in many posts. Often we see the results that we want to see or make conclusions on a single data point. If we don't have teh actual code or the developers to tell us what the equations are, then we can test. The way to really test it to create a mini-scenario where you can vary the factor you want and then run many turns.

I did this with a submarine/ASW conflict. I set one Japanese submarine against US two destroyers (Type J1 versus two Porters). I set both to end in the same hex. I ran it 5 times with a low aggression TF commander (set to 30) and 5 times with a high agression TF commander (70). The frequency of engagement between the two conditions show no statistically significant difference.

Just a single test with a few runs, but good enough to state that in the test runs the difference in commander aggression made no apparent difference.

Thanks for taking the time to report your results. I think that when faced with the choice, I will have a very hard time picking the low aggression commander all other factors being equal, regardless of what my rational mind tells me about the validity of your test.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

No offense, but 5 replications seems a bit low to really draw conclusions from. Not that this result would really surprise me, I'm guessing whether or not the DD spot the sub is of a much greater importance.

No offense, but 5 replications seems a bit low to really draw conclusions from. Not that this result would really surprise me, I'm guessing whether or not the DD spot the sub is of a much greater importance.

You are both correct and incorrect. I won't go into the math, as it can be fairly tedious for all but mathematicians, engineers, and statisticians. Five replications is enough to establish statistical significance. Significance is simply a measure that says that a difference is unlikely to have occured by chance. It says nothing about the relative importance of the result.

In the case of my test, the difference was small and the test of significance says that it was likely a random result. Based on that, If I ran many more test runs, I would expect the results for both sets to converge. That would be the most probable result.

of course, one of the most unsatisfactory things about real life (for non-engineers and such) is that you can't reach absolute certainty, but you can get close enough for all practical purposes. Five test runs leaves a relatively large chance that the test just failed to produce the difference.

I won't go into how I set up my hypothesis, but I'll provide the data set for anyone who wants. The engagements were day time and I set crew experience high and high constant leader chaaracteristics for the ship captains.

If I were to look at it and not understand, I would actually conclude that there is an inverse relationship between aggression and the probability of an engagement. That would be wrong.

If you want to improve the test, then add more ships and run more test runs. perhaps test agression = 1 against agression = 99. The test definately could use some improvement. I am not a big experimentalist. To me, that is tedious. Give me the data and I will play...

< Message edited by wwengr -- 1/18/2010 12:48:35 PM >

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

Also, I have never had it confirmed but am sure that you must assign the proper rank. For example, a brigade should be under the command of at least a brigadier, a major general for a division, a smaller unit should have a lt. colonel or full colonel, any combat TF force more than a few ships should be under at least a rear admiral and your front line fighter squadron should have a major in command not a Lt. or Captain. It seems to me that a unit performs better with an average officer of the proper rank than it does with a brilliant lower ranking officer.

I can't really comment about any correlation between the rank of the commander and the the performance of the unit. I have never examined it, nor I have noticed an effect. Anecdotally, I have seen that the rank of the commander choices correlate to the size and type of the unit. For instance, a carrier battlegroup will genrally have Captain through Vice Admirals as choices, a local minesweeping TF with one AMc will have only Ensigns, a local minesweeping TF with two AMc's will have Ensigns and Lieutenant JG choices, and a Transport TF with 50 ships will have Commanders and Captains as choices.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

One change is that naval HQ's now provide naval support, which increases loading/unloading speed. Don't think the leader affects this per se, but it is a huge change from Witp (in conjunction with the new loading routines).

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

One thing that seems to be missing from those lists is aggression. It has an impact on air ops. More aggressive leaders seem to push through attacks more often. More aggressive sub commanders will attack against greater odds and so forth.

One thing that seems to be missing from those lists is aggression. It has an impact on air ops. More aggressive leaders seem to push through attacks more often. More aggressive sub commanders will attack against greater odds and so forth.

I am not 100% sure of this, but I think more aggressive LCU leaders are less likely to surrender during land combat.

One thing that seems to be missing from those lists is aggression. It has an impact on air ops. More aggressive leaders seem to push through attacks more often. More aggressive sub commanders will attack against greater odds and so forth.

Good point. The original guide was based on a conservative and fairly rigid interpretation of the factors in the original WITP as reported by Mike Wood. Many things have changed in AE, so there is a likelihood that at least some of the guidance is either missing or wrong.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

5 replications can only establish significance for normally distributed data that is randomly sampled. I do not believe that either criteria is met here.

Most of the variables in the game are single sided distributions, not normal distributions.

Thought I read somewhere that the game engine was designed to give you identical results, to preclude "rolling for best result". To disturb the outcome, you have to make changes in the inputs, but these are not really random even though they give differeing results.

Test runs require making a new scenario for the test and starting a new game for each run. It is not sufficient to re-run a saved turn. As I understand it, the game applies many combat modifiers using random number generators. Given the multiple parameters, my guess would be that the distribution would be normal if it is principally summed functions or log-normal if combat results are multiplicative products of these independent randomized variables. There are different tests for different probability distributions and sample sizes, but... I've already admitted that my test was weak... I made unverified assumptions about the probability distribution. Even then, I simply failed ot reject the null hypothesis.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

Test runs require making a new scenario for the test and starting a new game for each run.

That should address the randomness, at least, as I understand what Gary initially created for the combat rolls.

As for the non-normal distribution, I'm not sure I agree. Most of the variables are bounded on at least one side. Example: max damage is to destroy the ship. It cannot also destroy a second ship. Minimum is a miss. These are hard boundaries that are not assymptotic. There are a lot of misses. Most other variable appear similar on at least one side and occasionally both as exampled.

Agreed. The only way to get to a really reliable result is to do a whole lot of runs. 5 x 5 like in my little test says that it is most likely random variation, but leaves a lot of room for it to just be a low probability result.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

Agreed. The only way to get to a really reliable result is to do a whole lot of runs. 5 x 5 like in my little test says that it is most likely random variation, but leaves a lot of room for it to just be a low probability result.

Agreed. And a lot of runs could be a LOT of runs. Almost everything we observe is multi-variant, and that just takes the sample size up and up.

For these leadership variables, unless one of the devs shares some more insight, I don't think we are going to get very far on our own. I think of the large variance in any battle outcome .. just too much involved. How many times have you run 7 Dec and just looked at PH results? Or the Force Z result? Huge variation. Separating the leadership effects out the battle result? What, there must be +20 independent variables involved in just a surface combat result. I don't even want to look at my charts for sample size to attain 90% confidence level. Scary sample size.

Which gets back to our original question to the devs: can we at least get some directional relationship definition of the leadership variables to game situations? We do not need quantitative, just qualitative statements. Confirm or rebut the response to the OP would be great.

Are you sure that aggression has no influence on the performance of an ASW Task Force? IIRC, ASW TFs react to detected subs the same way as a surface combat TF reacts to detected surface TFs, so I would suspect that aggression does matter?

Shouldn't the naval value be always also considered for finding submarines? I guess that is not only important for an ASW, Transport/Replenish & Escort TF.

Also is each test made on the values that the AG leader has? Check my notes in brackets: *** Pilot experience affects operational losses. (Sounds to me like each pilots value is important, not leader only) Air groups with morale < 50 must pass a morale test before flying an offensive mission. If the test is failed, no aircraft will fly. (And for this the AGs overall morale is used I guess) Air groups flying Naval Search, ASW Patrol, or CAP must pass two morale tests before flying. Each morale test failed reduces the number of aircraft flying by 25%. (Same as before) Level Bombers must pass three tests before flying an offensive mission. Each test failed reduces the number of aircraft flying by 25%:

Pilot experience affects the chances to find the target in a strike mission. (Sounds to me like each pilots value is important, not leader only) Pilot experience affects air-to-air combat results. (Sounds to me like each pilots value is important, not leader only) Leader’s air skill affects results in air-to-air combat. *** So what of this is really tested on the leader only?

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo For these leadership variables, unless one of the devs shares some more insight, I don't think we are going to get very far on our own.

I think you folks have gotten very far on your own. wwengr has defined the space very clearly. And Mike Wood, although not on the AE team, has very significant insights into the game system. He is as much a dev as anyone and his input should be put in your 'book'.

You guys are trying to make this way too hard. It's really very simple. So far as Naval stuff goes, if you look at wwengr's post, it's pretty clear, if you have any kind of "Surface" TF (and that includes subs), then pick a leader with good Naval stats. If you have any kind of "Air" TF, then pick a leader with good Air stats. If you have a mixed TF with CVs and BBs, then decide which is more important and go with that kind of leader but pick one with good secondary skills for the secondary ships. It's really that simple.

The sidebar crap doesn't matter much in the combat environment. Aggression helps mostly in responding to detection and reaction thingys. It does not help for airplanes, it does not help for gunnery, it only helps for things that require a response to something; is the dude aggressive? will he "hie to the sound of the hounds"? It's really that simple.

Admin, inspiration, leadership, work within sub, and sub/sub, routines that probably aren't of interest to you folks anyway, since they have little to no impact on detect, react, or combat, so I'll leave them alone.

wwengr's stuff, and an intelligent application thereof, is the best you all will ever get. I trust you all will use it wisely.